AeroPlus wrote:
There is nothing to do there in the summer, so the only reason to go there is to keep your site license valid if you have only the site license and no mountain rating.
Hmm…I did spend a couple of days hiking in the mountains around the altiport one summer eons ago… gorgeous hiking at that!
In my limited experience, some airframes take longer to get used to and that will affect margins too.
My Courchevel rating has long since expired but talking hypothetically……..in good weather I’d expect to comfortably land there in a DR400 without a refresher. I wouldn’t take my Cessna there without a refresher in something easier followed by a run or two with an instructor onboard.
Having only once been in a PA46 (would love one, one day) I think it would be a great many landings before I’d be comfortable to start more adventurous stuff.
Of course that’s just me.
Dear All,
I can tell you there was no malfunction with the involved aircraft.
The French safety board will produce its report from which I hope we can all learn.
As often, there is a chain of events and multiple layers.
Have a nice evening.
I wouldn’t take my Cessna there
Curious why you think a Cessna would be harder than a Robin? Personally I’d want to do it a couple of times with an instructor anyway, but I can’t see why it would be harder in my 182 than in a DR400 (in which I have acquired quite a few hours recently).
GA_Pete wrote:
Having only once been in a PA46 (would love one, one day)
I have a beautiful PA46 Mirage for sale if you are interested! Pretty hard to find a good one these days.
I happed to know but I won’t tell you.” How useful is that?
Usually two kind of individuals.
“Persons close to the investigation” are usually people who don´t know anything but have maybe picked up some nibblets of info and want their 5 seconds of fame or maybe cash in on a local news paper news scout scheme. Most of them are liers.
In this case here I think we are faced with someone who really knows what happened and is bursting to tell us, but is not allowed to by the pain of something severe. But he still can´t resist posting because he gets annoyed about the speculations he knows are wrong.
In which case one better stops reading those but by all means wait for the report before commenting.
In general often we do a lot of speculation right after an accident did happen but then do not spend as much attention when the actual report is available and things can be learned. Maybe we should focus our discussion on the previous F-GUYZ Mirage accident where the report is available. The pilot of this plane did many mistakes but looking at the data his approach was not as bad as I had assumed from the videos. It was really a sum of smaller errors lining up badly. A little fast, a little high, power reduced a bit late then he was a bit heavy which did not help and the result is known. But I think he would have gotten away with each of those errors but not all of them combined.
Sebastian_G wrote:
A little fast, a little high, power reduced a bit late then he was a bit heavy which did not help and the result is known. But I think he would have gotten away with each of those errors but not all of them combined.
IMO this is appropriate summary unlike “I know but I won’t tell you” which we saw earlier in this thread 
Emir wrote:
IMO this is appropriate summary
Of course, but such appropriate, one-paragraph summary, takes two years’ worth of investigative work and a 30-min effort to read it thoroughly in French and post an opinionated summary…something this thread has not enjoyed the luxury of, as of now. We cannot really expect such level of useful conclusions yet.
OTOH, some healthy debate with the available data, while not as useful, incentivates safe-flying thinking and is constructive.
Sebastian_G wrote:
we should focus our discussion on the previous F-GUYZ Mirage accident
Actually it is a useful comparison since it is the same PA-46-350 aircraft type:
F-HYGA the little we know is that it was an undershoot with too little energy (at least low enough altitude that it clipped the runway undershoot)
F-GUYZ was an overrun with too much energy
This brings to a very important earlier observation by @Malibuflyer as to a key element for a successful outcome
Malibuflyer wrote:
perfect landing technique
These two accidents highlight how critical such technique is on altiports with a heavyish aircraft: a bit too much or a bit too little energy and you get the result. The margin between both is much tighter than on a equivalent short, flat runway or with a lighter, slower aircraft
